Amit Langote writes:
> On Wed, Jun 2, 2021 at 4:39 PM Andrey Lepikhov
> wrote:
>> I played with your patch and couldn't find any errors. But what if ROW
>> operation were allowed to be pushed to a foreign server?
>> Potentially, I can imagine pushed-down JOIN with arbitrary ROW function
>> in its
On Wed, Jun 2, 2021 at 4:39 PM Andrey Lepikhov
wrote:
> On 2/6/21 02:32, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I wrote:
> >> I think a preferable fix involves making sure that the correct
> >> record-type typmod is propagated to record_in in this context.
> >> Alternatively, maybe we could insert the foreign table'
Tom Lane писал 2021-06-02 00:32:
I wrote:
I think a preferable fix involves making sure that the correct
record-type typmod is propagated to record_in in this context.
Alternatively, maybe we could insert the foreign table's rowtype
during execution of the input operation, without touching the
p
On Wed, Jun 2, 2021 at 6:32 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > I think a preferable fix involves making sure that the correct
> > record-type typmod is propagated to record_in in this context.
> > Alternatively, maybe we could insert the foreign table's rowtype
> > during execution of the input ope
On 2/6/21 02:32, Tom Lane wrote:
I wrote:
I think a preferable fix involves making sure that the correct
record-type typmod is propagated to record_in in this context.
Alternatively, maybe we could insert the foreign table's rowtype
during execution of the input operation, without touching the
p
I wrote:
> I think a preferable fix involves making sure that the correct
> record-type typmod is propagated to record_in in this context.
> Alternatively, maybe we could insert the foreign table's rowtype
> during execution of the input operation, without touching the
> plan as such.
Here's a dra
Alexander Pyhalov writes:
> Tom Lane писал 2021-06-01 21:19:
>> ISTM that using a specific rowtype rather than RECORD would be
>> quite disastrous from the standpoint of bloating the number of
>> distinct resjunk columns we need for a partition tree with a
>> lot of children. Maybe we'll have to
Tom Lane писал 2021-06-01 21:19:
Alexander Pyhalov writes:
What about the following patch?
ISTM that using a specific rowtype rather than RECORD would be
quite disastrous from the standpoint of bloating the number of
distinct resjunk columns we need for a partition tree with a
lot of children
Alexander Pyhalov writes:
> What about the following patch?
ISTM that using a specific rowtype rather than RECORD would be
quite disastrous from the standpoint of bloating the number of
distinct resjunk columns we need for a partition tree with a
lot of children. Maybe we'll have to go that way,
Amit Langote писал 2021-06-01 15:47:
Perhaps, we can get away with adding the wholerow Var with the target
relation's reltype when the target foreign table is not a "child"
relation, but the root target relation itself. Maybe like the
attached?
Hi.
I think the patch fixes this issue, but it
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 1:04 AM Alexander Pyhalov
wrote:
>
> Alexander Pyhalov писал 2021-05-31 15:39:
> > Hi.
> >
> > There's issue with join pushdown after
> >
> > commit 86dc90056dfdbd9d1b891718d2e5614e3e432f35
> > Author: Tom Lane
> > Date: Wed Mar 31 11:52:34 2021 -0400
> >
> ...
> > Y
Alexander Pyhalov писал 2021-05-31 15:39:
Hi.
There's issue with join pushdown after
commit 86dc90056dfdbd9d1b891718d2e5614e3e432f35
Author: Tom Lane
Date: Wed Mar 31 11:52:34 2021 -0400
...
You'll get
ERROR: input of anonymous composite types is not implemented
CONTEXT: whole-row refer
Hi.
There's issue with join pushdown after
commit 86dc90056dfdbd9d1b891718d2e5614e3e432f35
Author: Tom Lane
Date: Wed Mar 31 11:52:34 2021 -0400
Rework planning and execution of UPDATE and DELETE
To make sure that join pushdown path selected, one can patch
contrib/postgres_fdw/postgres_
13 matches
Mail list logo
